I'm going to be spending the next several weeks on a blog dedicated to opposition to Mitt Romney in the Massachusetts Prolife Community. He's getting some traction with evangelicals that are taking his miraculous makeover on face value.

I want everyone to know that while working my two jobs, taking care of my family and spending the time getting the word out there nationally on Mitt. (I'm additionally preparing a report to send to Fallwell, Robertson,many other prolife national leaders...and our orthodox Cardinals and Bishops, I am putting a final report together on Talking about Touching. I intend to send out nationally with the criminal and civil accountability tags to various people who have spent all these years enthroning it (in spite of the evidence).

I'll probably be limiting the posts here to a few times a week as I have for the last several weeks.

WASHINGTON, D.C., November 28, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The Catholic Medical Association has asked the U.S. bishops to stop using controversial sexual abuse education programs, aimed at teaching young children to protect themselves from abusers, in their dioceses.

Sure beats taking a good common sense look at your employees and volunteers, inquiring about their philosophies about sexuality and firing people who may be misleading the child into the hands of a partner because it's a cool thing to do and everyone is doing it....and remove them from access to children.

During the association's annual conference in Boston last month, the CMA released a 55-page study that condemned programs such as "Talking About Touching" as ineffective, out-of-step with child development, and not in keeping with the Church's teaching on the appropriate sex education of children, the National Catholic Register reported last week.

The report, entitled To Prevent and to Protect: Report of the Catholic Medical Association Task Force on the Sexual Abuse of Children and Its Prevention, echoes complaints from parents and pro-family groups against the safety programs implemented at the bishops' 2002 Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People.

Opponents criticized the programs for exposing young children to sexual concepts inappropriate to their age, and for burdening children with the responsibility of protecting themselves against sexual abuse.

Again, the most dangerous thing about this program is not mentioned in the article. I sure hope it's in the report.

99% of sexual predators haven't been caught and they ferret out situations to talk to kids about sex. The chances of a pervert being in a CCD classroom, picking out the weak kids in the class and building a personal relationship that will end up sexual, has increased a hundred fold.

In an article written April 28, 2003 Best Practices Journal Jack McCalmon, Esq., Director of VIRTUS Programs and Services (education subsidiary of USCCB insurer National Risk Retention Group) stated that “people who sexually abuse often pretend to offer a missing piece in a child’s life, if knowledge of sex is the missing piece you have given the offender an opening to exploit your child. It’s not uncommon for an offender to tell a child that he or she is teaching the child about love when, in reality, the offender is teaching the child about sex – for the offender’s own personal gain.”

So, what does he do?

He pretends there's a missing piece in Catholic children's lives. The knowledge of sex is the missing piece, giving every classroom, in every parish in the country the opening to exploit Catholic children.

It's hard to believe any individual would be so stupid, much less hundreds of men operating the Roman Catholic Church.

McCalmon goes on:

“I don’t want my child to be the kid in the group telling everyone else: “No, it’s called a thingamajig.”, McCalmon explains.

The man is an absolute poster boy for why the Roman Catholic church hires perverts. There's something wrong in the whichamacallits..noodles, noggins...hat racks.

“When a parent says he or she is protecting their child by not teaching the child about private body parts, their functions and sex, the parent is actually making the child more vulnerable”, said McCalmon.

I wonder how many think tanks and committees these wizards sat mystified trying figure out how Catholics have been procreating for two thousand years.

I have several friends who try to tell me that I made an egregious error when I didn't accept a position on the "committee" to evaluate "Talking about Touching" for the diocese.

How much drivel do you think I would have listened to before I stood up and said "You IDIOTS! The last thing we should be doing is putting immoral, amoral malformed laity in situations where they are selling their ideology to children who will be ripe to try it the next time a pervert crosses their radar and suggests they know something will feel good.

"We", the "parents", want to control "who" teaches our children about their private body parts and the "functions" of sex. We want to teach them sanctification, the holiness, the principles and guidelines of our precious, gentle, loving gift that will take their intimacy through a lifetime.

“Some parents—because of their own background and experience—have difficulty talking with their children about these issues. What they don’t realize is their discomfort with using proper names for body parts places their children at risk and may create a risk for other children" McCalmon continues.

That’s why teachers need to be properly trained to fill in the information void”

The bottom line here is, they are still failing to provide information to parents about the ideologies, theologies and sexually depraved philosophies of the people they put in charge of this nightmare - - and how it was, and how it is, affecting sexual conduct of the people who are under their tutelage.

The problem was and continues to be one of negligent hiring, negligent supervision, misfeasance and malfeasance and the malpractice of those purporting themselves to be experts in the prevention of sexual abuse of children.

The CMA report says sexual abuse of minors has not dropped since the education programs were implemented, which they argue reinforces their objections to the programs. Although opponents dispute the CMA's claim of unchanging abuse rates, the executive director of the CMA said whether or not the rates have changed is not the point of the reports' conclusions.

Yeah?

Well, when they find a pervert, who are they telling?

I've not heard of a single case in the country where Talking about Touching flushed out a pervert and everyone in the community was warned - have you?

Has anyone?

If they have found a pervert in Boston, they're keeping it a secret aren't they?

Deal's Window has some pretty upsetting information in it for Catholics:

Deal W. Hudson

In This Issue:

Gay Activism Threatens Catholic Bush Appointee

Why would government investigators from the Office of Personal Management be asking employees of the Office of Special Counsel about their religious affiliation?

A struggle is under way in Washington, D.C. between Catholic conservatives trying to uphold the rule of law and homosexual activists trying to twist it to their ends.

Last year (June 20, 2005), I wrote about attacks by gay activists on Scott Bloch, who heads the OSC, but the situation has worsened. Bloch's office is now in the midst of a lengthy, and expensive, investigation by OPM, headed by Linda Springer.

Aspects of this investigation are troubling, especially to Catholics.

Some OSC employees are reporting that they have been harassed and intimidated because of their religious affiliations.

For example, one attorney, a Catholic preparing to enter seminary, was challenged by OPM's investigators, led by Inspector General Patrick McFarland, as having an unjustifiably high salary because he was a Catholic.

Investigators asked another employee specific questions about the church he had attended when he lived in a different part of the country. Another was asked if he felt he was overpaid due to his religion and background.

Additionally, two attorneys who graduated from Ave Maria Law School have been singled out as "extremists" and were harassed about being from a "non-accredited" Catholic law school (Ave Maria is accredited).

Why are Catholic tax dollars being spent to pay government employees to harass other government employees about their Catholic faith?

As I reported in my Window of June 20, Scott Bloch is a Catholic and accused by gay activists of revising OSC in accord with his "religious beliefs". It's simply not true, as has been established in a Congressional hearing and a previous investigation.

One of OSC's major responsibilities is protecting federal workers from discrimination, and it is here that controversy arose.

Bloch's predecessor, Elaine Kaplan, tried to sneak sexual orientation into the law without Congressional approval. This was unlawful because "sexual orientation" appears nowhere in OSC's laws. In 1998, the court before which OSC practices rejected claims of sexual orientation discrimination because it is not contained in the law.

A Clinton appointee and an open lesbian, Kaplan coordinated with other homosexual activists to use OSC as a wedge in the culture war. Overt legislative offensives by liberals usually fail, and judicial activism can provoke electoral backlashes. They want to use this unlawful reinterpretation to browbeat states, localities, and private businesses into changing their laws and bylaws.

Citing the symbolic Clinton executive order on sexual orientation discrimination, Kaplan brazenly amended OSC's website to trumpet this revisionism and declared that OSC would enforce it despite multiple rejections by Congress.

Kaplan was aided by Clinton staffers at the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), an arm of the White House. OPM posted information on its website citing OSC's authority in this new sexual orientation policy.

Meanwhile, OSC added protections for "sexual orientation discrimination" to its own website, citing OPM's authority - in essence, they rested on each other's authority, without touching the hard ground of the law as written.

Because OSC is low-profile, only activists working with Kaplan inside and outside the Clinton administration fully understood what was happening. They aimed for getting homosexuals status recognition akin to ethnic protections (African-Americans).

So matters stood until 2004, when Bloch became Special Counsel. Bloch was approached by career attorneys troubled by the Kaplan policy. Seeing that it was unlawful, Bloch restored the website and OSC policy to what it had been for decades previous.

A firestorm ensued. He was assailed by activist groups and members of congress furious that he would defy them.

But OPM made no such review, and homosexual activists remained within the Bush OPM. The OPM website still references OSC as the enforcer of a nonexistent policy.

While this was happening, Bloch was getting OSC's day-to-day operations into much better shape than he found it. Aside from the unlawful policy, Kaplan had left the OSC a mess, with a backlog of massive proportions in all areas of the agency. The backlog spanned years, and in two cases a person had died while waiting for relief. OSC has quadrupled results for service members, slashed case processing times, and is said to be backlog free for the first time in a decade.

As Bloch's first year ended, he was secure in office while legislation to restore the Kaplan policy was moribund in Congress. But the activists were about to get a new reason to attack Bloch.

The OSC reorganization included creating a new field office to balance operations in Dallas, San Francisco and Washington, DC. At the request of the General Services Administration, OSC obtained offices in Detroit, and Bloch signed off on a plan to shift personnel around to accommodate the change.

Bloch stayed well within personnel guidelines, but OSC employees unhappy with the repeal of the Kaplan policy filed a grievance. They claimed that Bloch illegally altered the policy, that they were whistleblowers for bringing attention to his illegality, and that he was reassigning them as retaliation. This spawned five other investigations by Congress, GAO, and congressional committee staff, which have vindicated him.

Bloch referred the complaint to the President's Council on Integrity and Efficiency, a committee made up of the 60-odd Inspectors General. After months of deliberations between them and the White House Counsel, the decision was made to pick an Inspector General to contract with OSC to review the complaint.

In September 2005, the White House selected OPM and its Inspector General to conduct the investigation. OPM, you will recall, was the agency working with Kaplan to craft the policy and which, even today, references it.

Bloch and his staff objected to the choice of OPM – any Inspector General should be able to handle this case, but OPM had an obvious conflict of interest that should have barred them from involvement.

Having lodged his objections, Bloch allowed the investigation to proceed rather than be removed for failure to comply. It is important to note that OSC is an independent investigative and prosecutorial agency that is supposed to be free of White House interference.

The investigation was supposed to last two or three months. However, it has dragged out, and is currently ongoing.

One encouraging note: Senators Brownback, Inhofe, and DeMint wrote Bloch requesting all documents relating to the conflicts of interest and other problems with the investigation, including violations of constitutional rights.

Those documents reveal shocking irregularities of concern to all Catholics.

Some fear the investigation report will be slanted, and is being dragged out to pressure Bloch to resign.

It is disconcerting that a government agency is being allowing to harass a public official and his employees for their Catholic faith. Catholics should be keeping a very close eye on this situation and be prepared to defend fellow Catholics that are being discriminated against and harassed in the workplace.

TWO IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENTS:

I just spoke with the good folks over at Crisis Magazine, and they're offering a special discounted subscription to all readers of The Window: $10 for a year of Crisis. And for the first time, they're able to offer Canadians a discount as well... just US $12 for a year of Crisis to anyone in Canada.

Look, there's no question about it... Crisis Magazine is the best Catholic publication in the world. If you want to know what's going on in the Catholic Church, politics, and culture, it is absolutely required reading. Time and again, Crisis has been ahead of the curve with their coverage: a bombshell expose on priestly pedophilia printed 4 months before the Boston Globe "broke" the story; a multi-part study of how the Catholic vote would move to the Republican Party, printed 2 years before it did just that; a complete demolition of The Da Vinci Code, printed 5 months before everyone else started writing about it.

I could go on and on.

Incidentally, you can also get a gift subscription or even renew your subscription at the same discount. This is a perfect time to give a few Christmas gifts... no need to waste hours at the Mall when you could be spending time enjoying the season.

The fact is, $10 (or $12) is a fabulous discount on the most influential Catholic magazine in North America. Why not give it a try?

Because of the low price, Crisis can only make this offer available until this Friday at 5pm. Order now, while it's still on your mind. You cannot beat this price.

To get a new subscription, give a gift subscription, or renew your subscription in Canada, click here: https://www.ezsubscription.com/cri/subCA.htm

SECOND ANNOUNCEMENT:

I have been encouraged by a number of people at the grassroots level to start blogging. So, I have asked several friends to join me in commenting each day on issues that I hope will be of interest to you and others.

"I am obviously disappointed with this decision," Hastings, D-Fla., said in a statement thanking his supporters and promising to work with the panel's still-unnamed chairman. "I will be seeking better and bigger opportunities in a Democratic Congress. There is much to be accomplished and little time to reset this nation's economic and spiritual compass."

His toast to Pelosi sounds a little divisive:

In a sign of the bitterness that has surrounded the debate, Hastings closed his statement by saying: "Sorry, haters, God is not finished with me yet."

"He is doing all the right things for the social conservatives who drive the nomination process,"

While traveling the nation as head of the Republican Governors Association, the former venture capitalist has taken increasingly conservative stands on hot-button issues -- gay marriage, abortion, stem-cell research and immigration -- that could appeal to his party's conservative base.

Increasingly, he tweaked what he was saying and doing, opposing his own record to appeal to the Christian right.

Stephen Wayne, a Georgetown University professor and author of "The Road to the White House," said the move "is obviously related to his desire to appeal to the Christian right in the Republican Party."

Are some Christian right signing up with Romney?

Sure. But, for the most part, the grassroots is getting Romney's record out and yanking Christian right leaders off the bus.

The bill would require a wife to obtain her husband's written consent in the presence of a doctor before having an abortion. A doctor who allows an abortion without the written consent could face murder charges, Krutov said.

The purpose of the ads was to invite members of the Boston community to this holiday event,

I guess they figured diocescan employees, the Chancery, Sisters of St. Joseph and the Boston presbyterate wouldn't get the invitation unless they ran an ad in Bay Windows?

Will somebody please grab a Penthouse at 7/11 to see if they gave heteros equal opportunity to tour their Open House?

Certainly the invitation to our homosexual and lesbian community is edifying, but the invitation should have went out through Courage, our Catholic outreach program that does not stray from the teachings on the church.

Let's face it, an invitation through an ad in Bay Windows - which attacks Catholic teaching and those espousing it on a regular basis - is a perfect example of Cardinal Sean's Dog and Pony Show.

ya, ya, ya, ya!

Speaking of CC - they're keeping their "honoree" of this years Christmas party mighty quiet this year, wouldn't you say?

The young 16 year old leading actress in the film the Nativity is pregnant - and the article claims that the Vatican is embarrassed.

Having your 16 year old daughter pregnant is certainly not something that makes our list of top ten desires as parents....but who, in their right mind, would be embarrassed by a young woman who articulates the wisdom of being in a state of grace as our entire objective as Roman Catholics - who knew enough not to scandalize Christ's Church and her project - - and states she will embrace this child, this unexpected life, as a gift from God... with Mary as her source of spiritual richness.

The Diocesan Drivel came in the mail today (thank you to Fr. Anon.) (p.s. Is it me, or are they sending it out more than once a month??)

I got off on the wrong foot, attitude-wise, when I picked up a brochure which fell at my feet as I opened the package. I picked it up, and focused on a good sized picture of quite an odd little gadget with writing over it that said "Earthen Vessels".

"What the heck is that" I said to one of the kids, "It looks like a hash-hish pipe."

I realized, whatever the thing was, the brochure is from what I call the Mirimar Massage Parlor whom many of you will remember has a Buddah, ennegram and massage therapists program to renew the centrifical force of the diocescan priesthood.

A few interesting clergy assignments. (Still no announcement about Ron Coyne's appointment.) Right behind the announcements was a flyer called "PROCEDURE FOR THE APPOINTMENT OF PASTORS - Parts taken from Archdiocese of Boston - Pastoral Guidelines and Policies, Book II."

Essentially, it says, priests who want to be considered should contact Fr. Bob Deehan, Clergy Personnel Director with "reasons for his request/recommendation and provide background information on experience which he feels would be important for consideration by Clergy Personnel Board"

I'll have to dig up the names of that Board again. In any event - it goes on to say the "Board" reviews the parish profile, compares the names of people who submit interest to "this type of parish" and they all sit in front of a "dry erase board" and the Clergy Personnel Board "also surface names of priests they feel would also be suitable candidates for the pastorate under consideration" and comes up with three names "in order of preference".

It's all decided by the wizards, it says, with a "healthy blending of commitment to mission by the priest, an appreciation of the needs, gifts and interests of the priest and especially a concern for the pastoral needs of the people to be served"

The "Clergy Board" gives it to the "Regional Bishop" to obtain his recommendations. Then, they run it by the "Delegate for Investigations" to determine "if any of the priests on the slatte have personal/behavior issues". They then run all the names past the Chancellor to "obtain information about the priest's handling of financial/administrative matters".

The list is then given to Grand Pubah Sean and the "Clergy Personnel Director" who provides appropriate information about each priest on the slate". The Regional Bishop, the Vicar General and the "Secretary for Pastoral and Ministerial Services also provide insights at this meeting".

"At this point", it says, Cardinal Sean "either approves the list as it is, changes the order of preference, adds or deletes names or he may request another list" and "in some exceptional circumstances, Cardinal Sean may decide to make a direct appointment without engaging in this process completely".

The entire procedure is a farce. Unless, of course, by some miracle all these genuises come up with the name Sean was going to pick to begin with.

As an example of the fruit of this exercise, Fr. Naughton, who thinks the Latin Rite Community are wingnuts waiting for the spaceships, who doesn't know the Latin Mass and among other wacko left wing buffoonery, a few years ago published his intention to take the Blessed Sacrament out of the Worship space to put into a locked closet in the Sacristry, was appointed to our Latin Rite Community.

(please keep them in your prayers, the Chancery is sending the diocescan sled dog to the parish with an important announcement from the Cardinal...expectations are the wrecking ball is tragically swinging like the sword of Damocles.)

In other news, I had a glimmer of excitement when I saw Office for Clergy Support and Ongoing Formation announcing a program for "The Spiritual Excercises of Saint Ignatious in Every Day Life" - until I turned the paper over and it said "for further information, please contact Mrs. Mary Ann McLaughlin or Fr. John Sassani, Co-Directors of the 19th Annotation Retreat"

Also..."Fr. Bob VerEecke, pastor at St. Ignatius at Chestnuts Hills would like to invite priests of the Archdiocese to a performance of "A Dancer's Christmas", followed by a reception at "the Jesuit Community". It says it's "fast becoming a local tradition and for good reason".

I'm grateful that a huge wind seems to have come along and blown the last batch of leaves off my deck.

I'm grateful to be living in these times when we can be defending the faith and making a difference..and to be connected, to know, to meet so many who have valiantly grabbed a piece of the turf and are preserving, defending, taking active steps to advance the authentic faith.

I'm grateful for my family and my friends.

I'm grateful for my fabulous job and the people there who grace my life and this planet - even though they oppose many of the things we do to exercise our judgment to preserve, recruit, defend the culture we intend to pass on to our children.

The Lifesite story was posted on Spirit Daily...under "What in the world..."

You'll remember the diocescan chancellor had incorporated his privately held entertainment preferences into his parish:

The games at Most Holy Redeemer were described in a local homosexual newspaper, the San Francisco Bay Times, who said the event included sexually explicit activities. Prizes included porn DVDs and "sex toys" the paper said.

The "Sisters," whose motto is "go and sin some more" and describes itself as a "leading-edge order of queer nuns," planned to hold regular bingo games including one that featured, as master of ceremonies, "Peaches Christ" on the Feast of All Souls, the day on which Catholics traditionally pray for their dead.

The website also includes links to various homosexual activist groups including Dignity San Francisco, the Gay Catholic Forum, the Conference of Catholic Lesbians, and the dissident anti-Catholic organization, Voice of the Faithful.

Father Meriwether was appointed to his post as archdiocesan chancellor by the former archbishop of San Francisco, William Levada. Levada is now a cardinal and serves in Rome as the head of the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. As such, he is considered the second most powerful man in the Catholic Church.

Of course "the Vatican" is unheeded, programs that hire and appoint folks whose sexual ideology opposes the 10 Commandments, the Catechism and promote 'go and sin some more' is nearly every Bishop's (save for 24 I believe the count is)trajectory.

How can anyone deny that Levada is the very man who found Merriweather's trajectory crucial enough to his ideology to appoint him Chancellor? They are of like mind.

In fact, we know, and it's on the record, Levada not only was of like mind with Merriweather, and protected persons who then acted on their sexual urges with children - - he also had a profound administrative process that silenced and persecuted priests who "told" on pedophiles.

This is the man now second to the top at the Vatican.

Why do you think the Vatican is "unheeded"?

Duh.

Come now. Is anyone really surprised the Vatican is not protecting children from the ideology?

As far as I am concerned - it is quite profound - and in fact it was an ephiphany that out of 300, 400 priests in this diocese - we have two or three who care enough about the protection of children to stand up and be counted on the issue. It is very hard for me not to believe that the priests in this diocese , save for the handful, would look the other way if they knew a fellow priest was a pedophile, remains silent if they were appointed to a parish, and they would join the charade so long as they felt they themselves were doing "good works".

I know for a fact that Monsignor Deely who is over in Rome acting in his position to formally remove threats to children, is well aware of what is going on with the programs. He is not ignorant of the fact that teachers, volunteers, our priests, nuns, etc., support the sexual "freedom" of all individuals, including underage children. He knows full well that parents who object to having sexuality introduced as violent, as threatening, to their underage children are most concerned about how that will develop their id, their ego, their libido, their life-long formation that should develop sexuality as a holy encounter where God is present. Monsignor Deely is not unaware that parents and priests have been complaining to the diocese, to the Vatican that the children of Boston are in danger because Cardinal O'Malley and his lackeys appoint morally disordered who we have consistently pointed out have wanted to take on a community role of interceeding for children whom they feel are being sexually supressed by Catholic parents teaching chastity and holiness as their moral compass - - and have been harassed, threatened, maligned, slandered, silenced.

What has been done?

O'Malley was elevated to Cardinal - that what was done.

Anyone who can't see why the Vatican is "unheeded", as far as I'm concerend, has a big red ball at the end of their nose.